More stories

  • in

    Kamala Harris named world's third most powerful woman on Forbes list

    Kamala Harris has become the third most powerful woman in the world by virtue of being elected as America’s next vice-president, according to the latest rankings of a popular annual power list.The Democratic senator from California was catapulted right into the No 3 spot for her debut on Forbes magazine’s world’s 100 most powerful women list. She appears just below Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, and the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, who made the top spot for the 10th straight year, in the 2020 list published this week.Forbes highlighted Harris’s victory as Joe Biden’s running mate in the Democratic win over Donald Trump and his vice-president, Mike Pence, in the November race for the White House, noting she will be America’s first female vice-president and the first person of color in that role.Harris, who was the attorney general of California before being elected to the US Senate, will be the first Black American and first Asian American to be elected vice-president.She made a speech after the election victory in which she noted that she may be the first but she will not be the last woman in that role, and Forbes pointed to the break-out moment in her debate against Pence before the election when she confidently and calmly blocked Pence’s repeated interruptions by declaring: “Mr Vice-President, I’m speaking.”That riposte “launched a thousand memes (and even a handful of T-shirts), but it also became a rallying cry for women across America”, Forbes noted.Beyond the stand-out moment for Harris and US politics, the 2020 list prominently featured female leaders who have earned accolades on the world stage for their handling of the coronavirus pandemic.Women from prime ministers to corporate executives earned spots in the list for their achievements helping mitigate and control the deadly contagious virus, which has infected more than 67 million people and caused 1.54 million deaths, Forbes said.New Zealand’s prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, Taiwan’s president, Tsai Ing-wen, Finland’s prime minister, Sanna Marin, Lagarde, who was previously head of the International Monetary Fund, and the Tokyo governor, Yuriko Koike, were particularly effective, it said.“Where they differ in age, nationality and job description, they are united in the ways they have been using their platforms to address the unique challenges of 2020,” Forbes said on its website.It quoted Norway’s prime minister, Erna Solberg, also on the list, who said recently that “countries where human rights are respected and where women are able to reach top positions in society are also the countries that are the best-equipped to handle crises by Covid-19”.New Zealand eliminated coronavirus infections with a strict lockdown, reporting just over 2,000 cases of the virus and 25 deaths.Taiwan kept the pandemic under control after instituting strict restrictions and largely closing its borders in January, long before western countries, limiting cases of the virus to just over 700 and seven deaths, it said.Of the 17 newcomers to the Forbes list, Carol Tomé, chief executive of United Parcel Service, where delivery volumes soared during lockdowns, and Linda Rendle, chief executive of Clorox, which boosted production of cleaning goods as demand ballooned amid the surging virus, were noted for their work.At CVS Health, also in the US, Karen Lynch, who becomes chief executive in February, took over the pharmacy giant’s Covid response and extensive network of testing sites. In 2021, she will be responsible for overseeing vaccine distribution at the company’s nearly 10,000 US pharmacy locations.Stacey Cunningham, the first woman to head the New York stock exchange, made the “swift” decision to shut down in-person trading as the virus was spreading in March, it said.Britain’s Queen Elizabeth was just 46th on the list.Reuters contributed reporting More

  • in

    The Problem of Food Security in America’s Consumer Society

    Since the beginning of the 21st century and, more particularly, since September 11, 2001, the notion of security in the West has turned around the idea of terrorism and, more particularly, Muslim terrorism. During its first term, George W. Bush’s administration categorically refused the CIA’s findings identifying white supremacy as by far the most significant threat to national security. Bush forced the agency’s experts to put Muslim terrorism at the top of the list, despite all evidence to the contrary. Bush needed a reason to call himself a “wartime president.”

    Organized violence, such as the threat of war or terrorism, is not the only threat to security — or even the most significant. Today’s pandemic provides a dramatic example of a threat to security with an impact as great as war.

    Poverty has always been an unrecognized security threat. In a capitalist society, we have all been taught that poverty is inevitable because some people have failed to take advantage of the opportunities civilization offers them. Poverty represents some people’s failure to exercise their freedom to succeed. For some, it may be due to unmerited misfortune. But for most, it is explained as their own moral failings or their incapacity to rise to the challenge. That is why that wonderful activity we call charity exists. Because poverty is seen as an inevitable consequence of our wonderful system of economic organization, it is dismissed as a security threat.

    As past history has shown, poverty and famine have often led to revolt. But in this age of technology, those who might fear revolt take comfort from the sophistication of the technology that now exists to repress it. Pitchforks simply cannot rival armored Humvees operated by the security state.

    Who’s to Blame for a Tanking Economy?

    READ MORE

    Nevertheless, poverty has other ways of destabilizing societies whose elites believe their way of life represents the ideal of order and good behavior. The Trump years have vindicated the CIA’s traditional analysis identifying white supremacy as the most obvious threat to domestic security. Republicans like to characterize the essentially peaceful protests of Black Lives Matter as threatening, but they have clearly retained a character of protest rather than revolt. No one knows how the white supremacists currently refusing Trump’s electoral defeat may react when he is definitively dislodged in January.

    US culture has always minimized the reality of poverty, which now has a new face. Living in squalor in the inner city is one thing. But now more and more “respectable” Americans simply don’t have enough to eat. And at the end of this month, millions will discover they won’t be able to pay their arrears on rent. Already, millions can’t afford their daily bread. Some struggle to even bury their dead.

    The Associated Press quotes a report that lists some startling numbers: “In four states — Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama and Louisiana — more than 1 in 5 residents are expected to be food insecure by year’s end, meaning they won’t have money or resources to put food on the table.” Some states are more affected than others: “Nevada, a tourist mecca whose hotel, casino and restaurant industries were battered by the pandemic, is projected to vault from 20th place in 2018 to 5th place this year in food insecurity, according to a report from Feeding America.”

    Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

    Food insecurity:

    The inability to feed a significant portion of the population, a condition that theoretically disappeared after the agricultural revolution of the 20th century, but which has become endemic principally in the United States in the 21st century due to the acceptance of its dogma that wealth inequality is the vocation of a dynamic modern society.

    Contextual Note

    The media present the idea of food insecurity as a problem for individuals and their families, not as a social problem. And yet the queues of cars waiting for hours for handouts bear comparison with the image of soup lines we associate with the Great Depression. The sheer length of these modern-day bread lines puts to shame the black-and-white images of people waiting for handouts in the 1930s. For many, the car they drive to the food banks has become their only shelter. Many have lost their homes, as many more will in the months to come. It isn’t even clear how many own their cars, though repossessing from the homeless has become a challenge for creditors.

    Embed from Getty Images

    Law enforcement strategists may already be thinking that the idea of food insecurity represents something more than a state of personal anguish for isolated individuals in times of pandemic. At some point, today’s pandemic may become tomorrow’s pandemonium. In other words, like everything else in a society built on the foundational idea of the individual’s “pursuit of happiness,” the cumulative effect of an experience shared on an increasingly wide scale leads to its recognition as a potentially insoluble social problem.

    What better illustrates the phenomenon than the opioid crisis? Until only a few years ago, US media treated the problem of addiction as a personal drama that affected random individuals. Like Frank Sinatra’s character in the 1955 film “The Man with the Golden Arm,” the victims needed to acquire the courage to kick the habit and rejoin healthy society. But when, a decade ago, statistics began revealing a rapidly mounting number of deaths by overdose — not limited to down-and-out jazz musicians in an urban nightmare or the black minority — opioid addiction became “the opioid crisis.” Even rural whites were involved. 

    That meant that it was time to analyze the phenomenon as a security threat, to be treated the way any extensive social crisis is treated, by taking into account complex economic, sociological and even commercial factors that structure the crisis. It became a topic that politicians could now talk about out in the open. In 2020, food security is reaching a similar point of public recognition. Since Ronald Reagan’s presidency, Republicans have led an insurgency campaign against food stamps. They see food assistance as a demeaning symbol of the acceptance of the maligned welfare state. Given a challenge, true Americans will always rise up on their own initiative to meet it. Handing out food shamefully discourages that vibrant sense of initiative.

    Earlier this year, as the cars began lining up in increasing numbers on their way to food banks, the Trump administration tried to block the distribution of food stamps allowed by the Coronavirus Food Assistance program. But in an economy that is shedding jobs, hunger doesn’t simply go away thanks to an individual’s willpower, especially in a consumer society that for decades has literally fed the trend toward super-sizing and obesity.

    Historical Note

    When the symptoms of poverty traditionally associated with marginalized minorities emerge as a feature of the landscape to which a majority may be exposed, even an ideologically rigid society may begin to rethink the relationship between poverty and security. The poorer classes in the US have for most of the past century created a false sense of order in their lives through obsessive consumer behavior. Addiction took a variety of forms, most of which were deemed “healthy” for the economy, if not for the consumers themselves, from Coca-Cola and McDonalds to reality TV. 

    Addictive behavior seemed to define the American way of life. In contrast, the wealthier segments of society focused on ensuring their security by living in a separate mental and physical world. One prominent late 20th-century trend among the upper-middle class was the retreat into gated communities. Seeking to move further and further away from multiracial cities, neighborhoods emerged that looked comfortably residential while benefiting from military-style security, including armed guards at their unique entrance. They were effectively sealed off from the rest of society.

    The gated community mentality has now become a largely unconscious feature of US culture. The idea of security has itself become an obsession in stark contrast with the romantic tradition that celebrated the rugged individualism of the West and of early capitalism. It has justified the creation of the national security state.

    The US is now undergoing perhaps its deepest historical and cultural psychodrama since the Civil War. The reality of a crisis of “food security” reflects more than just the disastrous material effects of growing inequality. It highlights an extraordinary conflict capable of undermining traditional cultural assumptions. History has repeatedly shown that there is no cure for cultural chaos.

    *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

  • in

    After the Trump years, how will Biden help the 140 million Americans in poverty? | Mary O'Hara

    After four punch-drunk years of Donald Trump, the weeks since the November presidential election have presented a chance, despite his machinations to overturn the result, to reflect on what might come next for the tens of millions of Americans struggling to get by. What lies around the corner after the departure of an administration that brought so much destruction matters to the lives of the least well-off and marginalised people?
    President-elect Joe Biden sought to reassure people that he was on the case when he announced his top economic team last week. “Our message to everybody struggling right now is this: help is on the way,” he said, offering a steady economic hand to a weary public rattled by the virus and an unprecedented economic crisis.
    Many people are simply so relieved that Biden and Harris won that they talk about “getting back to normal” after the chaos. That’s an understandable reaction given all that’s transpired. However, getting back to normal isn’t an option. Nor should it be the goal. When Trump took power, around 140 million Americans were either poor or on low incomes even without a pandemic – a staggering proportion.
    For decades the wages of those at the top soared while paychecks for those at the bottom flatlined. Gender and racial income and wealth disparities endure. Despite widespread support for boosting minimum earnings, the federal minimum wage of $7.25 hasn’t been increased since 2009. Roughly 60% of wealth in the US is estimated to be inherited. And, as if this wasn’t enough to contend with, in 2020 billionaire wealth surged past $1tn since the start of the pandemic. The Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) calculates that the wealth of Amazon’s Jeff Bezos alone leapt by almost $70bn to a colossal $188.3bn as the year draws to a close.
    Over the past four years I asked myself frequently what another term of the Trump wrecking ball would mean for the people at the sharp end of regressive policies and a reckless disregard for the most vulnerable in society. Thankfully, that is no longer the question. The question now is: after all the carnage, what next?
    So far, indications are that Biden and his team recognise that as well as confronting the gargantuan challenges unleashed by Covid-19, longstanding inequities cannot be left unchecked. The presidential campaign was calibrated to highlight this, including around racial injustices. Overtures have been made, for example, on areas championed by progressives such as forgiving loan debt for many students and expanding access to Medicare. Biden has also pledged to strengthen unions and, well before the pandemic during his first campaign speech, endorsed increasing the federal minimum wage to $15.
    Even in the face of unparalleled challenges – and while a lot rides on a Democratic win in the two Georgia Senate run-offs in January – Biden could and should “use all the tools” at a president’s disposal to shift the dial quickly, says Sarah Anderson, director of the Global Economy Project at the IPS. Examples include placing conditions on workers’ pay for companies bidding for federal contracts and leveraging the presidential “bully pulpit” to try to push proposals such as a minimum wage hike through the Senate.
    There is also a genuine opportunity for the new administration to spearhead a concerted focus on policies affecting more than 61 million Americans who are disabled – a group all too often ignored in presidential campaigns and sidelined in policy. Biden’s disability plan makes for a comprehensive read. Off the bat, if the new administration takes steps to overturn the “abject neglect of disability rights enforcement” under Trump in areas ranging from education to housing it would be off to a good start, argues Rebecca Cokley, director of the disability justice initiative at the Center for American Progress.
    The pandemic is the most pressing challenge facing the incoming administration. However, structural inequalities, the people lining up at food banks, the children going hungry or homeless, historic injustices and the out-of-control concentration of wealth, must also be priorities. Right now, the US at least has a chance to finally put some of this right. However in the UK, with the end of the Brexit transition period looming and the chancellor under pressure to fend off accusations that another dose of austerity isn’t on the way, it’s a whole different story. The lessons in both countries from past mistakes – ones that harm those most in need – must be learned.
    • Mary O’Hara is a journalist and author. Her latest book, The Shame Game: Overturning the toxic poverty narrative, is published by Policy Press. She was named best foreign columnist 2020 by the Southern California Journalism Awards More

  • in

    Qatar Is Set for Its First National Elections

    President-elect Joe Biden’s foreign policy will be anchored in the traditional pursuit of America’s international role and interests. Biden has had a lengthy career in the Senate, where he served as the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. He also served as vice president under Barack Obama for eight years. Biden’s many speeches and comments …
    Continue Reading “Qatar Is Set for Its First National Elections”
    The post Qatar Is Set for Its First National Elections appeared first on Fair Observer. More

  • in

    Trump officials scramble to justify decision not to buy extra Pfizer vaccine doses

    The Trump administration on Tuesday scrambled to justify a decision not to buy millions of backup doses of a Covid-19 vaccine developed by Pfizer as the vaccine appeared likely to become the first approved for use in the United States.Government regulators with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced favorable preliminary findings on Tuesday from a review of Pfizer data, following approval for use in the UK and the first post-approval vaccination there.The Trump administration last spring made a deal for 100m doses of the Pfizer vaccine candidate, but the administration turned down an offer to reserve additional doses, Scott Gottlieb, a current Pfizer board member and former FDA commissioner, confirmed on Tuesday.“Pfizer did offer an additional allotment coming out of that plan, basically the second-quarter allotment, to the US government multiple times – and as recently as after the interim data came out and we knew this vaccine looked to be effective,” Gottlieb told CNBC.“I think they were betting that more than one vaccine is going to get authorized and there will be more vaccines on the market, and that perhaps could be why they didn’t take up that additional 100m option agreement.”With global demand for its vaccine soaring following successful trial results and approval in the United Kingdom, New York-based Pfizer cannot guarantee the United States additional doses before next June, the New York Times reported.The extent to which the decision not to acquire more of the Pfizer vaccine could impede the vaccination effort in the United States was unclear.The news came as the US was on the verge of surpassing 15 million coronavirus cases, the highest number in the world.A second vaccine candidate is currently up for emergency approval from the FDA, and multiple additional vaccine candidates – some of them easier to manage than the Pfizer vaccine, which must be stored at extremely cold temperatures – are in the final stages of clinical review.But Donald Trump and officials involved in the vaccine development program scrambled on Tuesday to head off the perception that the government had failed to get first in line for sufficient supplies of a vaccine produced by an American-based company. US-based Pfizer partnered and its German pharmaceutical partner, BioNTech, are on track to have the first vaccine approved in the US.To celebrate the good vaccine news and tout his role in it, Trump planned to host an event at the White House on Tuesday billed as a “vaccine summit”. He planned to unveil an executive order to prioritize vaccine shipments to “Americans before other nations,” but as with many headline-grabbing orders issued by Trump the decree did not appear to be impactful or enforceable, analysts said.Asked on ABC’s Good Morning America on Tuesday how the order would work, the official in charge of the government’s vaccine development program, Operation Warp Speed, Moncef Slaoui, said: “Frankly, I don’t know.”Health officials named by president-elect Joe Biden, who will lead the vaccine rollout effort after taking office next month, were not invited to the White House event, underscoring the risks of a lack of continuity in the effort.And executives from two drug companies, Pfizer and Moderna – whose own vaccine candidate is also up for approval from the FDA – were invited to the White House by Trump but declined, Stat News reported.Slaoui defended the administration’s decision not to buy more doses of the Pfizer vaccine, in his appearance Tuesday on ABC, saying they were looking at several different vaccines during the summer when it had the option to lock in additional Pfizer vaccine doses.“No one reasonably would buy more from any one of those vaccines because we didn’t know which one would work and which one would be better than the other,” said Slaoui. Before taking his current post, Slaoui resigned from the Moderna board.The US government has also contracted for 100m doses of the Moderna vaccine. Both vaccines require two doses per patient, although a preliminary report on the Pfizer vaccine issued on Tuesday by the FDA found some protection after just one dose.The report, which found “no specific safety concerns identified that would preclude issuance” of an emergency use authorization, accelerated the path to approval. “FDA has determined that [Pfizer] has provided adequate information to ensure the vaccine’s quality and consistency for authorization of the product under an EUA,” the report said.A spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services told the Times that in addition to Pfizer and Moderna, the government had signed contracts for doses for other vaccine candidates that have not yet reached the stage of seeking regulatory approval.“We are confident that we will have 100 million doses of Pfizer’s vaccine as agreed to in our contract, and beyond that, we have five other vaccine candidates, including 100 million doses on the way from Moderna,” she said. More

  • in

    Trump holds vaccine summit amid scrutiny over Pfizer deal failure

    Donald Trump aims to take credit on Tuesday for the rapid development of coronavirus vaccines, even as concerns grow about supply and timelines for inoculating Americans and the government comes under scrutiny for failing to lock in a chance to buy millions of additional doses of one of the leading contenders.That decision could delay the delivery of a second batch of doses until Pfizer fulfills other international contracts.The revelation, confirmed by people familiar with the matter, came on the eve of Trump’s plans to host a White House summit aimed at celebrating the expected regulatory approval of the first vaccine for emergency use in the US, later this week.The news came as the first person to receive a coronavirus vaccination in the world since regulatory approval was granted, post-clinical trials, was a 90-year-old woman in the UK who was inoculated on Tuesday.It also emerged as the US was set to surpass 15 million coronavirus cases and experienced a record death toll in the past week of almost 16,000 Americans killed as a result of Covid-19, the highest totals in the world.Trump’s administration is seeking to tamp down public skepticism over the vaccine and secure a key component of the president’s legacy.The focus was to be on the administration’s plans to distribute and administer the vaccine, but officials from the president-elect Joe Biden’s transition team, which will oversee the bulk of the largest vaccination program in the nation’s history once he takes office on January 20, were not invited.Pfizer’s vaccine is expected to be endorsed by a panel of regulators from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as soon as this week, with delivery of 100 million doses – enough for 50 million Americans as two shots per person are required for optimal immunity – expected in coming months.Under its contract with Pfizer, the Trump administration committed to buy an initial 100 million doses, with an option to purchase as many as five times more.This summer, the White House opted not to lock in an additional 100 million doses for delivery in the second quarter of 2021, according to a report in the New York Times, backed by others who spoke to The Associated Press about the matter on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.Days ahead of the vaccine’s expected approval, the administration is reversing course, but it is not clear that Pfizer, which has since made commitments to other countries, will be able to meet the latest request on the same timeline.The Pfizer vaccine is one of two on track for emergency FDA authorization this month, the other coming from drugmaker Moderna.The Trump administration insisted late Monday that between those two vaccines and others in the pipeline, the US will be able to accommodate any American who wants to be vaccinated by the end of the second quarter of 2021.Health secretary Alex Azar told NBC the administration is “continuing to work across manufacturers to expand the availability of releasable, of FDA-approved vaccine as quickly as possible … We do still have that option for an additional 500 million doses.”The “Operation Warp Speed” summit will feature Trump, vice president Mike Pence and a host of government experts, state leaders and business executives, as the White House looks to explain that the vaccine is safe and lay out the administration’s plans to bring it to the American people.Senior administration officials provided details on the summit on Monday. An official with the Biden transition confirmed no invitation was extended.Officials from the pharmaceutical companies developing the vaccines also were not expected to attend, despite receiving invitations, according to people familiar with the matter.Some expressed concerns about the event contributing to the politicization of the vaccine development process and potentially further inhibiting public confidence in the drugs.Trump is set to kick off the event with remarks aiming to “celebrate“ vaccine development, according to an official who previewed the event.Trump also will sign an executive order to prioritize Americans for coronavirus vaccines procured by the federal government. A second official said the order would restrict the US government from donating doses to other nations. More

  • in

    Can America Come Together to Fulfil Its Failed Promise?

    With America in the grips of a ravaging pandemic, a corrupt loser narcissist still at the helm and unmasked “freedom” fighters meandering among us, there is so much to do and so much opposition to doing it. It remains utterly inexplicable how uncoordinated and erratic the national response continues to be to the spectacle of …
    Continue Reading “Can America Come Together to Fulfil Its Failed Promise?”
    The post Can America Come Together to Fulfil Its Failed Promise? appeared first on Fair Observer. More